A Florida court recently reversed a decision regarding child support calculations in the divorce case of Jeffery Tutt v. Tymesia Hudson, case number 2D19-1437. The ruling impacts how income can be imputed to a parent for child support purposes, particularly in cases of alleged underemployment.
In this case, Jeffery Tutt, the former husband, challenged the trial court's decision to impute an income of $500 per day to him for child support calculations, retroactive to 2017. The court found that there was insufficient evidence to support the claim that Tutt was voluntarily underemployed or capable of earning that amount. This decision is significant for parents going through divorce proceedings, as it clarifies the standards for income imputation in child support cases.
Background
The parties involved in this case are Jeffery Tutt and Tymesia Hudson, who were married and later divorced in 2016. During their marriage, Tutt was primarily a stay-at-home father while Hudson worked as a physician. After their divorce, Tutt began driving for rideshare companies like Uber and Lyft and obtained a real estate license.
The dispute arose when Tutt's former wife sought to modify the final judgment of dissolution of marriage, specifically concerning child support payments. The trial court found that Tutt was capable of earning $500 per day, which would total $125,000 annually, and based its decision on Tutt's own testimony and a vocational expert's assessment. Tutt, however, argued that he had never earned that much and that the trial court's findings were not supported by substantial evidence.
The Ruling
The District Court of Appeal of Florida ruled in favor of Tutt, reversing the trial court's decision regarding the imputed income. The court stated, "The trial court's imputation of income in the amount of $125,000 to the former husband starting in 2017 is not supported by competent, substantial evidence." The judges involved in this ruling were Morris, Northcutt, and Silberman.
The appellate court emphasized that while a trial court can impute income to a parent who is underemployed, there must be evidence showing that the parent has the capability of earning that income. In Tutt's case, the court found that there was no competent evidence that he could have earned $125,000 per year starting in 2017, as he had never earned more than $60,000 in any previous year.
Impact
This ruling has important implications for future child support cases in Florida. It clarifies the standards that courts must use when determining whether to impute income to a parent. The court highlighted that income cannot be imputed at a level that a parent has never earned without special circumstances. This case sets a precedent that could affect how courts assess a parent's earning potential and the evidence required to support such claims.
Additionally, the court found merit in Tutt's argument regarding the trial court's failure to make specific findings about his contentiousness when determining attorney's fees. The appellate court noted that the trial court did not adequately explain how Tutt's behavior impacted the attorney's fees incurred, which is a necessary component when considering fee awards in divorce cases.
What's Next
The court has remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with its opinion. This means that the trial court must reevaluate the imputed income and the attorney's fees awarded, taking into account the appellate court's guidance. It is unclear if either party will appeal this ruling further, but for now, the case will return to the lower court for re-examination.